DocWire News Editors

DocwireNews

A mixed-method study of Dutch patients, presented at the 63rd American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting &amp; Exhibition, examined treatment preferences among patients with Waldenstr&ouml;m macroglobulinemia (WM).This study comprised a literature review, qualitative interviews, and expert discussions. A discrete choice experiment questionnaire was developed to assess treatment-related characteristics, including:<ul>
<li>five-year progression-free survival (PFS)</li>
<li>frequency and type of administration (intravenous, subcutaneous, or oral)</li>
<li>treatment setting (clinic or home)</li>
<li>adverse events</li>
<li>risk of future secondary malignancies</li>
<li>type of treatment agent (chemotherapy or targeted therapy)</li>
</ul>Respondents were presented with two hypothetical, but realistic, treatment options and asked to choose between them. Questionnaires were disseminated nationally either online, via a patient organization&rsquo;s website, or paper assessments completed at outpatient clinics.In total, 330 online and 17 paper-based questionnaires were completed; 214 (65%) had complete data and were included in the analysis. The average age of respondents was 66 years, and 54% of the cohort were male. Average time since diagnosis was 6.9 years. Regarding disease status, 31% were in the wait-and-see period, 39% were in remission, 10% had progressive disease, and 20% were currently being treated.Respondents rated five-year PFS as the most important attribute for making treatment decisions. The probability of choosing a treatment option increased by 26% if the five-year PFS rate rose from 50% to 70%. The risk of secondary malignancies was the second most highly rated attribute. Selection of a treatment rose by 22% if the chance of secondary malignancy decreased from high to low. Risk of neuropathy was a greater consideration compared to nausea, vomiting, and extreme fatigue. To avoid risk of neuropathy, patients were willing to accept a 7.2% reduction in treatment efficacy. Selection of a treatment was 8% more likely with a fixed-duration, intravenous/subcutaneous administration at a hospital compared to an ongoing oral regimen at home.The authors reported that patients&rsquo; demographic characteristics and treatment status were not significantly associated with treatment preferences. However, educational status was the one exception: patients with a higher education status were more accepting of a treatment with a lower five-year PFS than patients with lower education levels (p &lt; 0.0001). Those with higher education tended to prefer targeted therapy and treatments with low risk of secondary malignancy (p &lt; 0.0001).&ldquo;These are the first data on WM patients&rsquo; preferences on treatment characteristics,&rdquo; wrote the authors in conclusion. &ldquo;These data can be used in discussions with individual patients about their treatment preference and help direct future clinical trials that optimally connect to WM patients&rsquo; preferences.&rdquo;

Sara Nunnery, MD, MSCI

Reclassifying HER2: What Oncologists Need to Know About HER2-Low and -Ultralow Breast Cancer

HER2 Breast Cancer

Jeffrey Perl, MD

Joel M. Topf, MD, FACP

Thoughts From the 2025 Lazarus Award Winner

NKF Spring Clinical Meetings 2025

Brandon Twyford

DESTINY-Breast09 Demonstrates First-Line Superiority of Enhertu Plus Pertuzumab in HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer

Latest News

Study Investigates Patient Preferences in Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Treatment

ASH Annual Meeting and Exposition 2021

A mixed-method study of Dutch patients, presented at the 63rd American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting &amp; Exhibition, examined treatment preferences among patients ...

About Us

Editorial Policy

Advertising

Contact Us

eNewsletters

Contribute

Career Center

MashupMD

Blood Cancers Today

Cancer Nursing Today

GU Oncology Now

Urban Health Today

Bile Duct Cancer

Colorectal Cancer

Gastroesophageal Cancer

Gastric Cancer

GEP-NETs

GIST

Liver Cancer

Pancreatic Cancer

GI Oncology Now

Anemia

Deep Vein Thrombosis

Essential Thrombocythemia

Hemophilia

Immune Thrombocytopenic Purpura

Myelodysplastic Syndromes

Myelofibrosis

Myeloproliferative Neoplasms

Polycythemia Vera

Pulmonary Embolism

Sickle Cell Disease

Thrombocytopenia

Thrombophilia

Thrombosis

Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura

Venous Thromboembolism

von Willebrand Disease

Heme Today

Acute Kidney Injury

ADPKD

Anemia and Kidney Disease

Chronic Kidney Disease

COVID-19 and Kidney Disease

Diabetes and Hypertension

End-Stage Renal Disease

Gout

Hyperkalemia

IgAN

Kidney Transplantation

Metabolic Acidosis

Nephrology Times

HR Breast Cancer

Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Genetics & Breast Cancer

Breast Cancers Today

Atherosclerotic Disease

Atrial Fibrillation

Heart Failure

Hypertension

Interventional Cardiology

Lipid Management

Practice Tips With Dr. Lichaa

Preventive Cardiology

Stroke

Cardiology

Breast Cancer

Gynecologic Cancer

Head and Neck Cancer

Skin Cancer

Oncology

Sleep

Urology

Diabetes

Ophthalmology

— Demodex Blepharitis

Neurology

Rheumatology

Gastroenterology

Pulmonology

Infectious Diseases

— HIV

Health and Wellness

Lupus

Future of Medicine

Orthopedics

Pharmacology

Career News

More

Conferences

CardioNerds

The Sleep Source With Dr. Morse

Rheumatology Rounds With Dr. Maheswaranathan

Partners

Expert Interviews

Subscribe